posted at 11:29 am on February 3, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Remember when the Susan G. Komen Foundation cut off grants to Planned Parenthood for being under Congressional investigation — er, sorr, for not actually providing outcomes? Good times, good times:

We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women’s lives.

The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.

Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.

Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.

It is our hope and we believe it is time for everyone involved to pause, slow down and reflect on how grants can most effectively and directly be administered without controversies that hurt the cause of women. We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue. We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics – anyone’s politics.

On a certain level, I get exactly what they mean. I think it is a fair point that suspending grants because of investigations should come from criminal probes — although there have been a few of those as well involving Planned Parenthood affiliates — even if granting agencies have the ability to decide on that criteria for themselves. Otherwise, any investigation in Congress for any particular purpose would get used to block legitimate charities from getting grants no matter what the motives behind the probe might be.

Still, Komen would be better off sticking with outcome-based criteria for grants. If Planned Parenthood performs the mammograms needed for screening, then certainly it’s a legitimate action to offer a grant funding that activity. If all they’re doing is providing referrals, though, why not just fund the organizations actually performing the mammograms that catch cancer early enough for treatment, as well as the organizations actually providing that treatment? The objection has been that the grants look much more like a method to fund abortions while asserting that Komen is only working on breast cancer, which is why so many people objected to the arrangement in the first place — and why critics applauded the move announced earlie this week.

The statement doesn’t actually commit to doing anything differently, if it is carefully read. All Komen is saying is that Planned Parenthood is still eligible for grants, having rescinded their suspension that was based on the Congressional probe, and that grants already approved would continue. Komen notes that they will still develop the guidelines that will help their funding directly impact their mission, and I’d bet that means that Planned Parenthood will still get a lot less money from Komen in the future, as most of their clinics don’t provide mammograms or treatments. This is just a more intelligent approach to the issue, and one that would not have created the political firestorm that arose this week had Komen taken it from the beginning.

Update: Greg Sargent read the statement the same way I did and contacted a Komen board member, who confirms that Komen isn’t going to guarantee Planned Parenthood any future funding:

I just got off the phone with a Komen board member, and he confirmed that the announcement does not mean that Planned Parenthood is guaranteed future grants — a demand he said would be “unfair” to impose on Komen. He also said the job of the group’s controversial director, Nancy Brinker, is safe, as far as the board is concerned.

As some were quick to point out, the statement put out by Komen doesn’t really clarify whether Planned Parenthood will actually continue to get money from the group. The original rationale for barring Planned Parenthood was that it was under investigation (a witch-hunt probe undertaken by GOP Rep Cliff Stearns). Komen said today that the group would “amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political.”

Does that mean Planned Parenthood will get Komen grants in the future?

I asked Komen board member John Raffaelli to respond to those who are now saying that the announcement doesn’t necessarily constitute a reversal until Planned Parenthood actually sees more funding. He insisted it would be unfair to expect the group to commit to future grants.

“It would be highly unfair to ask us to commit to any organization that doesn’t go through a grant process that shows that the money we raise is used to carry out our mission,” Raffaelli told me. “We’re a humaniatrian organization. We have a mission. Tell me you can help carry out our mission and we will sit down at the table.”

In other words, grants will likely be outcome-based, and that would keep Planned Parenthood on the outside in most cases. Sargent also reports that the board strongly supports Brinker through this episode and her job is not in danger, which would also tend to support that conclusion.

Update II: Jen Rubin provides another data point that makes this policy clear:

The Post interviewed Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure CEO Nancy Brinker and President Elizabeth Thompson on Thursday. At that time, they confirmed that their group wants to stick to its core mission and not simply funnel funds through another entity that doesn’t itself provide breast cancer screening. (“We have decided not to fund, wherever possible, pass-through grants. We were giving them money, they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms.”) We don’t knowwhether that rationale is now null and void.

Pardon me, but this is nuts. Planned Parenthood can raise its own money (which it did in spades in the wake of the flap). Those who want to give to a breast cancer charity can donate with the peace of mind that their money will be used to fight breast cancer. (Donors did so generously as a result of the controversy.) Now Planned Parenthood’s bosses have every right under current law to do what they do and raise money to fund their organization. But shame on them for intimidating other groups that might contemplate the same move as the Susan G. Komen Foundation made.

It sounds to me like this statement was carefully crafted to underscore that policy, not reverse it, as Sargent discovered.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Honey child, Margaret Sanger was all about killing black children through abortion. What about her history do you fail to understand?

Why are you not educating yourself on who this monster was and what her legacy is? Please. Educate yourself

Key West Reader on February 3, 2012 at 1:14 PM

sanger might have been racist as it was so common in the time. but pay notice to luther king praise of her work:

Sanger believed that lighter-skinned races were superior to darker-skinned races, but would not tolerate bigotry among her staff, nor any refusal to work within interracial projects.[83] Although Sanger’s views on race appear archaic from a modern viewpoint, some of her contemporaries in the African-American community supported her efforts. In 1929, James H. Hubert, a black social worker and leader of New York’s Urban League, asked Sanger to open a clinic in Harlem.[84] Sanger secured funding from the Julius Rosenwald Fund and opened the clinic, staffed with African-American doctors, in 1930. The clinic was directed by a 15-member advisory board consisting of African-American doctors, nurses, clergy, journalists, and social workers. The clinic was publicized in the African-American press and African-American churches, and received the approval of W. E. B. Du Bois, founder of the NAACP.[85] Sanger’s work with minorities earned praise from Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1966 acceptance speech for the Margaret Sanger award.[86]

also, i not sure how relevant is the history of the PP founder. are you suggesting that PP today is a racist organization that main objective is to kill blacks babies? you really believe this?

The parental notification laws are all about shaming girls into not having an abortion. If she’s pregnant than the “parenting” has already failed. She has the right to decide how her life will be and if she decides she’s not ready for a child, that is also her right. I am proud of my temporary home of IL, one of the few to not require consent or notification (along with Montana, California, Washington, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont). Some states still value freedom.

I believe that PP like most liberal agencies regardless of their intentions, enslave minoritiy populations by hooking them with free crap and not doing anything to foster self reliance or self improvement. PP, public education, welfare, none of them have done a bit of good in the past 50 years. They just give free passes for poor behavior.

“The suffering of the poor is something very beautiful and the world is being very much helped by the nobility of this example of misery and suffering,”

~Mother Teresa.

What a saint.

Pablo Honey on February 3, 2012 at 1:21 PM

I would recomend you read up about the history of Mother Theresa as well as some of her writings and this quote will make perfect sense in the context in which it was spoken and in the context of her life.
She is a great saint indeed. I would like to see some of our liberal friends spending decades doing nothing but bathing, cleaning and feeding the poor, and loving and respecting them as precious human beings.

This is the nonsensical posts that adds to the banning of stupid people…just a comment to cause a commotion.

right2bright on February 3, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Actually I think that’s a comment that gets into this person’s inner soul. Certainly a more enlightening comment than the never ending Romney trolling. Add that to biographical information this guy has provided and the picture becomes even clearer.

also, i not sure how relevant is the history of the PP founder. are you suggesting that PP today is a racist organization that main objective is to kill blacks babies? you really believe this?

nathor on February 3, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Absolutely their main objective is to kill black babies. Where do they operate? What segment of society do they serve? They don’t just run clinics to make a buck. They advocate and promote child murder. If you’re poor (and too often black) they will do their damnedest to try and convince you abortion is the best option. They are not about family planning. They are about exterminating undesirables.

I don’t know what the big deal is. My buddy has a life sized signed poster of a smiling Hitler in his living room but that doesn’t make him a racist. He has disavowed all the most racist stuff and is just taking the good part of Hitlers legacy.

The parental notification laws are all about shaming girls into not having an abortion. If she’s pregnant than the “parenting” has already failed. She has the right to decide how her life will be and if she decides she’s not ready for a child, that is also her right. I am proud of my temporary home of IL, one of the few to not require consent or notification (along with Montana, California, Washington, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont). Some states still value freedom.

Yesterday, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer(DEMOCRAT) vetoed SB 97, which would require girls under 16 to obtain parental consent for abortion procedures. While SB 97 would have provided a judicial bypass, allowing minors to privately consult a judge under certain conditions, the governor believed SB 97 to be unconstitutional. Issues of parental consent are becoming an increasingly common issue in individual states as proponents argue that minors should not undergo any procedure without parental consent, while opponents believe behavior should not be legislated and every individual has the right to privately elected health procedures.

The parental notification laws are all about shaming girls into not having an abortion. If she’s pregnant than the “parenting” has already failed. She has the right to decide how her life will be and if she decides she’s not ready for a child, that is also her right. I am proud of my temporary home of IL, one of the few to not require consent or notification (along with Montana, California, Washington, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont). Some states still value freedom.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Parents tell their daughter to abstain from sex until she’s an adult, but if she doesn’t, make absolutely sure her partner uses a condom. Condom breaks, she gets pregnant. Clearly, the parents “failed,” right?

also, i not sure how relevant is the history of the PP founder. are you suggesting that PP today is a racist organization that main objective is to kill blacks babies? you really believe this?

nathor on February 3, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Is their objective today to specifically target black babies? I don’t know. I do know that their main objective is to kill babies. It has nothing to do with “women’s health”. None what-so-ever. Planned Parenthood is one of the most despicable organizations that has ever existed.

Not funny actually. It isn’t a parent’s business if their child has an abortion.

And to answer your other claim. I don’t think abortion is the only solution for an unplanned pregnancy. I think women should have that option.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Since the child is UNDER AGE, and not legally able to make decisions for herself, and they are responsible for her, it very much is their business if their child wants an invasive surgical procedure performed on her. She couldn’t get an appendectomy without parental consent, but she can get abortion? That’s some logic you’ve got going there.

My other claim was that Planned Parenthood doesn’t believe in giving a woman information about options other than abortion. That isn’t “choice.” That’s coercion.

I put “parenting” in quotation marks precisely to communicate that parental authority is not absolute and that teenage girls often make bad choices or mistakes or have accidents. If she chooses to tell her parents then more power to her. But if she chooses to get an abortion and doesn’t want to tell her parents, she should not have to. The law should not require virtue and honesty.

To be honest, though, I think it’s far-fetched that PP is spending the screening money on anything but screening.

RightOFLeft on February 3, 2012 at 1:32 PM

You may be right.

But personally, as a pro-lifer, it doesn’t matter to me whether the Komen money goes to services other than screening or not. I won’t give money to an organization that performs abortions, no matter what other services it provides. Nor would I give money to a middleman org like Komen if I know it is funding an abortion-provider in any way.

I would still like to see the breakdowns, though. Thanks for the info you’ve found.

Like Amadou Diallio? Like Sean Bell? And the tens of thousands of others? Every life is sacred huh? Except not really to you.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:48 PM

A small percentage of incarcerated/executed prisoners are innocent. 100% of aborted babies are innocent. But please, keep up the moral equivalency. It’s suitably hilarious.

By the way, remember that with libfreeordie, we’re talking about a person who claims to hate racism, lashes out at completely innocuous “dog whistles,” yet lauds both a known racist president (LBJ) and a “humanitarian” that would have considered libfreeordie an “undesirable” and encouraged his parents to be forcibly sterilized for the good of the white race.

Is their objective today to specifically target black babies? I don’t know. I do know that their main objective is to kill babies. It has nothing to do with “women’s health”. None what-so-ever. Planned Parenthood is one of the most despicable organizations that has ever existed.

Shump on February 3, 2012 at 1:51 PM

they’re set up in low income neighborhoods. They disproportionately kill minorities. That’s not a huge stretch.

The parental notification laws are all about shaming girls into not having an abortion. If she’s pregnant than the “parenting” has already failed. She has the right to decide how her life will be and if she decides she’s not ready for a child, that is also her right. I am proud of my temporary home of IL, one of the few to not require consent or notification (along with Montana, California, Washington, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont). Some states still value freedom.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:39 PM

So would you then agree that a 15-year-old girl should be able to consent to having her appendix removed without her parents consenting or being aware of the procedure? Should she be able to elect gastric bypass surgery because she feels that she desperately needs to lose weight? Should she be able to go to a plastic surgeon and have breast implants?

Because at the moment, every single one of those items, and every other medical procedure of any sort save for abortion, requires the consent of the parents. The presumption is that a 15-year-old girl is not informed nor mature enough to make those types of potentially life-changing decisions for themselves. Thus, why we have the age of majority and place the responsibility for decision making upon parents or guardians until that point.

Like Amadou Diallio? Like Sean Bell? And the tens of thousands of others? Every life is sacred huh? Except not really to you.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:48 PM

So typical and boorish. Not possible to offer a reasonable argument for your position so instead you change the subject and offer oddities and extreme exceptions to what generally occurs. Yes, all professions have a few bad actors. But what is the general aim of any given organization? The police are tasked with enforcing the law and all people are equal under the law. PP, on the other hand, has tasked itself with exterminating the poor. And a disproportionate number of those poor are black.

The parental notification laws are all about shaming girls into not having an abortion. If she’s pregnant than the “parenting” has already failed. She has the right to decide how her life will be and if she decides she’s not ready for a child, that is also her right. I am proud of my temporary home of IL, one of the few to not require consent or notification (along with Montana, California, Washington, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont). Some states still value freedom.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:39 PM

The parental notification laws are about parental rights and responsibilities to protect their child from predators who will force their child into doing something they might not approve of. They aren’t about “freedom.”

It’s so easy to sit and say children will have sex, so just let them kill their baby if they conceive one, when you have absolutely no awareness whatsoever of the value of unborn human life. There is no way to get through to someone who thinks the way you do. You have a mindset that is ground in stone. You will never acknowledge that there is anything whatsoever wrong with your thinking.

they’re set up in low income neighborhoods. They disproportionately kill minorities. That’s not a huge stretch.

DHChron on February 3, 2012 at 1:53 PM

…

… but the original plan was to set up in low income neighborhoods and disproportionately kill minorities. It is hard to just snap it in half and pretend the one didn’t follow the other, or that if it did, it doesn’t matter, because they aren’t related anymore.

I believe that PP like most liberal agencies regardless of their intentions, enslave minoritiy populations by hooking them with free crap and not doing anything to foster self reliance or self improvement. PP, public education, welfare, none of them have done a bit of good in the past 50 years. They just give free passes for poor behavior.

gator70 on February 3, 2012 at 1:40 PM

enslave them? or enslave the ones that actually pay for the free stuff? welfare i really dont like, but things like basic public education are essential to maintain a minimum level of education in our society.

Absolutely their main objective is to kill black babies. Where do they operate? What segment of society do they serve? They don’t just run clinics to make a buck. They advocate and promote child murder. If you’re poor (and too often black) they will do their damnedest to try and convince you abortion is the best option. They are not about family planning. They are about exterminating undesirables.

saying its all about exterminating undesirables its a serious slandering of the organization that actually does very good things like STD’s testing and cancer prevention of the same black people that you claim they hate.

I put “parenting” in quotation marks precisely to communicate that parental authority is not absolute and that teenage girls often make bad choices or mistakes or have accidents. If she chooses to tell her parents then more power to her. But if she chooses to get an abortion and doesn’t want to tell her parents, she should not have to. The law should not require virtue and honesty.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Taking an aspirin at school as a 17 year old high school senior = requires parental notice and approval.

Until PP builds a firewall between their abortion services and their *real* women’s health programs, I cannot in good conscience give to any organization that gives them money. Every dollar given to PP, even if earmarked for Pap smears or self-exam brochures, frees up a dollar to fund abortions.

Is their objective today to specifically target black babies? I don’t know. I do know that their main objective is to kill babies. It has nothing to do with “women’s health”. None what-so-ever. Planned Parenthood is one of the most despicable organizations that has ever existed.

saying its all about exterminating undesirables its a serious slandering of the organization that actually does very good things like STD’s testing and cancer prevention of the same black people that you claim they hate.

nathor on February 3, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Hate? They don’t hate blacks. They pity them and think they are doing them a favor by slowly exterminating them. You posted something earlier about Sanger viewing blacks as inferior but not tolerating racism within her organization. This is not a contradiction. Our pets are certainly inferior to us, but we don’t abuse them.

PP views itself as doing a great service by providing kindness to those see as animals.

Public education? Really? No it is not necessary. We pump more money into PE than most every other county and achieve some of the worst results. Everything the government does socially is a disaster because nobody thinks about long term consequences. And yes, I firmly believe government social programs and many non-profits keep people from achieving, they just enslave them with free stuff. Why the heck else would they keep voting democrat?

On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people.

On sterilization & racial purification:
Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial “purification,” couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.

On the right of married couples to bear children:
Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her “Plan for Peace.” Birth Control Review, April 1932.

On the purpose of birth control:
The purpose in promoting birth control was “to create a race of thoroughbreds,” she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)

On the extermination of blacks:
“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” she said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

On adultery:
A woman’s physical satisfaction was more important than any marriage vow, Sanger believed. Birth Control in America, p. 11

“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

Worse, what you did, while helping a few students, encouraged and supported the social/educational low-standards and helped ensure the status quo was/is maintained… What you did as part of an organized support system (“transition program”) was simply act as an enabler.

rogerb on February 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM

It’s neat how quickly you respond when you don’t understand a topic, and then afterwards you’ll give no response at all.

I’d bet that means that Planned Parenthood will still get a lot less money from Komen in the future, as most of their clinics don’t provide mammograms or treatments.

That’s true, but I think it’s also misleading.

It fails to mention that PP does foot the bill for screening when they give a referral. You can’t just walk into a radiologist’s office, ask for a mammogram, and say, “Don’t sweat it, Komen will pick up the tab later.” It makes more sense for Komen to fund popular clinics like PP and let the referrer handle the payment.

RightOFLeft on February 3, 2012 at 12:56 PM

No Planned Parenthood clinics do mammograms and using PP to funnel money for them makes no sense. But this entire thing makes me rather sick to my stomach. All those people walking for life and funding the murder of children. I’m fairly certain they had no idea that’s what they were supporting.

Some quotes from Planned Parenthood’s founder and author of its mission statement–and if this doesn’t make you slightly ill, I don’t know what to say:

Six Quotes Hint Why Marget Sanger Received “a dozen invitations” to speak at Ku Klux Klan Rallies
Margaret Sanger wrote about her Ku Klux Klan speech in her autobiography, “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

What did she say in her talk at the KKK Rally that led to twelve more invitations? Well, take a look at some of her past quotes:

1) “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

2) “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”

Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review.

3) “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism … [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant … We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”

Planned Parenthood’s bosses have every right under current law to do what they do and raise money to fund their organization. But shame on them for intimidating other groups that might contemplate the same move as the Susan G. Komen Foundation made.

Yes, but look how effectively the intimidation worked. And it didn’t hurt the abortion rabble-rousers that they had the full support of the MSM in their quest.

The dangerous aspect for organizations like PP is that the more they expose themselves and their thuggish tactics to the American public, the more suspicious the public will become of them. In the end, that may be one of the best things to come out of this current controversy.

saying their main objective is to kill babies its a serious slandering of the organization that actually does very good things like STD’s testing and cancer prevention.

nathor on February 3, 2012 at 2:01 PM

If a hit man spends 90% of his time running a food bank, teaching inner city kids how to read and raising stray dogs, I guess we shouldn’t incarcerate him, right? After all, he only spends 10% of his time killing innocent people. Think of all the good he does!

I just did a quick Google search on the risk of dying from an abortion. Both the Guttmacher Institute and the National Abortion Federation, the first two results Google returned, agree that there is a risk of death from abortion. Yes, it is a comparatively small risk. According to the latter source, in the past five years, six women have died in North America due to complications from abortion and 0.5% of those having abortions have had serious enough complications to warrant further surgery or hospitalization. Those numbers are small. They are not non-zero.

There are other extremely safe medical procedures that have low risk of serious complications. Look up the death rate due to complications of a tonsillectomy. According to my quick research, the rate of having complications from the procedure — both serious and non-serious — is about 1% and the rate of death from complications is about 1 in 35,000 or 0.002%. Much lower risk than abortion.

Yet try to to get a tonsillectomy performed on a 15-year-old without parental consent. Won’t happen.

Morality aside, it was the wrong decision to form a relationship with Planned Parenthood in the first place, or any other organization under the Liberal Causes umbrella. Once you join that family, you never get out. Just ask Starbucks, Whole Foods, and Joe Lieberman.

Once in, it was risky to try to dump them. There was going to be consequences. Apostasy is always worse than heresy.

But they did it. They made a clean break. They were free…for a day. But they couldn’t take their medicine. They caved. So now they’re back in the fold, and they’ll be feeling it from both sides.

So you’re going to protest women walking in “Walk For the Cure” marathons with pictures of baby fetuses. Yup, that’ll definitely convince people to support giving up their legally protected right to an abortion.

Pictures of aborted fetuses are not designed to “convince people to support giving up their legally protected right to an abortion,” they’re informative. Other than child p0rn, pictures of aborted fetuses are probably the most censored images in our society (e.g.: Matt Drudge lost his late ’90s Fox News Channel TV show because he wanted to show a picture of a living fetus, which was still too controversial for Roger Ailes). Because of this, many people think of abortion only as “a right” and not what it really is: the bloody, deadly ending of human life usually performed for frivolous and/or selfish reasons.

Contrary to popular belief, many people’s minds have been changed about abortion once they see the truth balancing the omnipresent, clean-and-tidy feminist propaganda.

I guess Westboro’s not too far out of the social conservative mainstream after all.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 11:52 AM

If you were as smart/informed as you think you are, you would know that…

2. After making its reputation as a pro-civil rights activist church in the sixties, Westboro’s raison d’etre for the past twenty years has been insisting that the United States is doomed to destruction by the hand of God because it tolerates sodomy. While it did picket the funeral of assassinated partial-birth abortionist George Tiller, its focus has been on targeting fallen soldiers’ families for abuse at military funerals, their logic being that the Almighty struck them down in battle because they were fighting for a gay-friendly nation. They’re not fans of abortion, but their primary targets are gays, soldiers, and America itself. Their infamous signs are cruel, rude, and blasphemous, but they don’t have aborted fetuses on them.

I am proud of my temporary home of IL, one of the few to not require consent or notification (along with Montana, California, Washington, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont). Some states still value freedom.

libfreeordie on February 3, 2012 at 1:39 PM

If the topic is parental notification, then you’re talking about the ‘freedom’ of minors to make major life decisions. There are valid societal reasons why that freedom is constrained: minors, by definition, are not legal adults and hence incapable of making adult decisions. They’re children. More importantly, they’re someone’s child. You don’t get that?

Approximately 10% of every woman that walks through the door will have an abortion. They don’t give us the exact number of patients. But we do know it’s approximately 3 million people.

Planned Parenthood health centers saw approximately three million patients, who collectively received nearly 11 million services during nearly five million clinical visits.

Using a percentage to indicate services provided is quite misleading, because obviously some people are getting more than one type of service per visit.

But you really have to dig into the numbers provided by them to get a better understanding of what they do.

By and large, PP is mainly used for contraception and STD issues. I think that’s pretty clear.

(Then again, it may be standard practice that they test everyone for an STD. The reason I state this is because they say they performed 3,552,955 STD tests, yet claim to have only seen approximately 3 million people. I guess some people could have been tested multiple times in one year, but I doubt that happens very often. So to gin up a service as percentage if it’s something they do on everyone is highly misleading.)

The bottom line, no matter what, approximately 10% of every woman who walks into a PP center is having an abortion.

Only 841 referrals to an adoption agency.

31,098 people serviced with prenatal care.

So, approximately 1% of women who walk into a PP center will actually receive care for a pregnancy where they keep the child.

Not a healthy sign to me. It definitely indicates there is a culture of death within their doors.

After revelations in Philadelphia, Ill., inspectors visited all nine licensed abortion clinics that are designated as pregnancy termination centers, a regulatory category that limits those nine clinics to performing first-trimester abortions and no other procedures. The Northern Illinois Women’s Health Center in Rockford, above, and the Women’s Aid Clinic in Lincolnwood were among those nine inspected clinics. The state found health and safety violations and issued emergency license suspensions for both clinics.

Hate? They don’t hate blacks. They pity them and think they are doing them a favor by slowly exterminating them. You posted something earlier about Sanger viewing blacks as inferior but not tolerating racism within her organization. This is not a contradiction. Our pets are certainly inferior to us, but we don’t abuse them.

PP views itself as doing a great service by providing kindness to those see as animals.

NotCoach on February 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM

this is nuts.. you really think that is what the PP leadership thinks?

my guess is that PP people, instead of paying attention to the eugenics and racist views that Sanger had, they gather inspiration from other of her stories:

In 1913, Sanger worked as a nurse in New York’s Lower East Side, often with poor women who were suffering due to frequent childbirth and self-induced abortions. Searching for something that would help these women, Sanger visited public libraries, but was unable to find information on contraception.[15] These problems were epitomized in a story that Sanger would later recount in her speeches: while Sanger was working as a nurse, she was called to Sadie Sachs’ apartment after Sachs had become extremely ill due to a self-induced abortion. Afterward, Sadie begged the attending doctor to tell her how she could prevent this from happening again, to which the doctor simply gave the advice to remain abstinent. A few months later, Sanger was once again called back to the Sachs’ apartment — only this time, Sadie was found dead after yet another self-induced abortion.[16][17] Sanger would sometimes end the story by saying, “I threw my nursing bag in the corner and announced … that I would never take another case until I had made it possible for working women in America to have the knowledge to control birth.” Although Sadie Sachs was possibly a fictional composite of several women Sanger had known, this story marks the time when Sanger began to devote her life to help desperate women before they were driven to pursue dangerous and illegal abortions.[17][18]

no wonder Feminism was so popular back in the early 1900 with stories like this. but of course, now that contraception and woman rights are taken for granted, prolifers have no moral qualms in demonizing the whole organization just because of the 3% they spend in abortions, ignoring all the contraception access PP provides that is so important to prevent stories like the ones above.